RealGM

Who do you see being capable of it in the league right, if anyone at all?

I would probably pick the Celtics although I am not sure a. how important Al Horford is for this end and b. how good he looks for the next few regular seasons. Maybe a fully healthy Nuggets team could do this too(?)

wherever victor lands.except knicks.

Doncic/Gobert Mavs

Jaivl wrote:Doncic/Gobert Mavs

WIth Gobert I can totally see this given his chops in the regular season. I hesitated to say the Mavs because I wasn't thinking of Gobert and I have yet to have seen them as this regular season juggernaut (might have something to do with Luka's up-and-down play before the postseason).

Crossing 8+ SRS is extremely hard. It requires elite talent, health and commitment to the regular season. In the last 23 seasons it has only happened 15 times.

1. Golden State: 3 times, ATG (top 30 players) talents in their prime,
2. Milwaukee: 2 times, ATG talent in his prime,
3. SAS: 2 (Teens), No ATG in his prime but several ATG post/pre prime, extreme depth, ATG Coach
4. BOS(2008)/CLE(2009)/HOU/LAL (2000)/OKC (2013)/SAS(2007): all had ATGs in their prime
5. UTA 2020

Outside of the 2020 Jazz you really need a top level talent in his prime or close.

Looking at this I see Sixers, Nuggets, Bucks and Mavs as best shot.

sp6r=underrated wrote:Crossing 8+ SRS is extremely hard. It requires elite talent, health and commitment to the regular season. In the last 23 seasons it has only happened 15 times.

1. Golden State: 3 times, ATG (top 30 players) talents in their prime,
2. Milwaukee: 2 times, ATG talent in his prime,
3. SAS: 2 (Teens), No ATG in his prime but several ATG post/pre prime, extreme depth, ATG Coach
4. BOS(2008)/CLE(2009)/HOU/LAL (2000)/OKC (2013)/SAS(2007): all had ATGs in their prime
5. UTA 2020

Outside of the 2020 Jazz you really need a top level talent in his prime or close.

Looking at this I see Sixers, Nuggets, Bucks and Mavs as best shot.

Why not the Celtics? They were at +7 to end the season and they really only started to figure things out at the midway point or a little earlier.

Max123 wrote:

sp6r=underrated wrote:Crossing 8+ SRS is extremely hard. It requires elite talent, health and commitment to the regular season. In the last 23 seasons it has only happened 15 times.

1. Golden State: 3 times, ATG (top 30 players) talents in their prime,
2. Milwaukee: 2 times, ATG talent in his prime,
3. SAS: 2 (Teens), No ATG in his prime but several ATG post/pre prime, extreme depth, ATG Coach
4. BOS(2008)/CLE(2009)/HOU/LAL (2000)/OKC (2013)/SAS(2007): all had ATGs in their prime
5. UTA 2020

Outside of the 2020 Jazz you really need a top level talent in his prime or close.

Looking at this I see Sixers, Nuggets, Bucks and Mavs as best shot.

Why not the Celtics? They were at +7 to end the season and they really only started to figure things out at the midway point or a little earlier.

,
Removing Utah as they will reshuffle, the only 5 teams for 2022 much over 3 were Suns Celtics, Warriors, Grizzlies, Heat.
And you give 4 other teams the best shot.
3 to 8 is a long way to go

DQuinn1575 wrote:

Max123 wrote:

sp6r=underrated wrote:Crossing 8+ SRS is extremely hard. It requires elite talent, health and commitment to the regular season. In the last 23 seasons it has only happened 15 times.

1. Golden State: 3 times, ATG (top 30 players) talents in their prime,
2. Milwaukee: 2 times, ATG talent in his prime,
3. SAS: 2 (Teens), No ATG in his prime but several ATG post/pre prime, extreme depth, ATG Coach
4. BOS(2008)/CLE(2009)/HOU/LAL (2000)/OKC (2013)/SAS(2007): all had ATGs in their prime
5. UTA 2020

Outside of the 2020 Jazz you really need a top level talent in his prime or close.

Looking at this I see Sixers, Nuggets, Bucks and Mavs as best shot.

Why not the Celtics? They were at +7 to end the season and they really only started to figure things out at the midway point or a little earlier.

,
Removing Utah as they will reshuffle, the only 5 teams for 2022 much over 3 were Suns Celtics, Warriors, Grizzlies, Heat.
And you give 4 other teams the best shot.
3 to 8 is a long way to go

The takeaway I took from this data is without an ATG near their prime it is basically impossible. I don't think Tatum can get there and Horford is aging.

sp6r=underrated wrote:

DQuinn1575 wrote:

Max123 wrote:Why not the Celtics? They were at +7 to end the season and they really only started to figure things out at the midway point or a little earlier.

,
Removing Utah as they will reshuffle, the only 5 teams for 2022 much over 3 were Suns Celtics, Warriors, Grizzlies, Heat.
And you give 4 other teams the best shot.
3 to 8 is a long way to go

The takeaway I took from this data is without an ATG near their prime it is basically impossible. I don't think Tatum can get there and Horford is aging.

Don't think it's necessarily true. Certainly it's worded quite a bit too strongly.

Maybe one could quibble older eras are less relevent but
1) If I'm distinguishing eras I'd be looking at a very short recent window as the covid era and then be wondering if it continues or we're changing again.
2) The Jazz and 10s Spurs make up 3 of 14 teams. Even within that sample calling that route "basically impossible" seems a stretch. This assumes Harden is in your top 30 ATG definition or Paul is still in prime and counts despite significant absences (both possible, neither striking me as a given otoh).

But going older, '86 Bucks, '91 Blazers, '94 Supersonics (and other versions adjacent). Does Frazier get you there for the 70 Knicks?

From '22 it's hard to say what "normal" was with covid but the Celtics and Suns were about a point away. Could they have got there with a bit more health and or some players (including top players) being a little better and still meet the criteria ... I would think so. Memphis is further but has so many players a long way from that all time elite line (and even Ja).

It's easier to get there with an all time elite guy (and there's some catch 22: if your team succeeds to a high level [though moreso title than an SRS threshold] the perceived star must be historically elite) especially in the era of individual player max contracts but I think other routes are possible.

Owly wrote:Don't think it's necessarily true. Certainly it's worded quite a bit too strongly.

Maybe one could quibble older eras are less relevent but
1) If I'm distinguishing eras I'd be looking at a very short recent window as the covid era and then be wondering if it continues or we're changing again.
2) The Jazz and 10s Spurs make up 3 of 14 teams. Even within that sample calling that route "basically impossible" seems a stretch. This assumes Harden is in your top 30 ATG definition or Paul is still in prime and counts despite significant absences (both possible, neither striking me as a given otoh).

But going older, '86 Bucks, '91 Blazers, '94 Supersonics (and other versions adjacent). Does Frazier get you there for the 70 Knicks?

From '22 it's hard to say what "normal" was with covid but the Celtics and Suns were about a point away. Could they have got there with a bit more health and or some players (including top players) being a little better and still meet the criteria ... I would think so. Memphis is further but has so many players a long way from that all time elite line (and even Ja).

It's easier to get there with an all time elite guy (and there's some catch 22: if your team succeeds to a high level [though moreso title than an SRS threshold] the perceived star must be historically elite) especially in the era of individual player max contracts but I think other routes are possible.

1. Harden is definitely in my top 30. The 11 of 14 teams account for 78% of the sample size.
2. The teens Spurs had ATGs at the tail end of their primes who still had occasional burst of brilliance and a player entering that stage who had flashes of brilliance. And they had a unique benefit in the modern era of a bunch of guys who spent years playing together. Which leaves us only with the Jazz as a outlier
3. Older teams: fair to point out that some teams in prior eras did reach this threshold. The big change is the 1999 CBA which you touch on in the end. The 1999 CBA resulted in superstars being massively underpaid. This makes it much harder for ensemble teams to compete at the highest of levels since their players can receive their true monetary value while teams built around superstars have a lot of surplus cash relative to production.
4. It is harder to improve from a 7 to a 8 than a 1 to a 2 due to all the backslides a +7 SRS team faces every year.

If you want my statement to say the "post-1999 CBA makes it unlikely for an elite team to emerge without a top 3 talent barring unusual circumstances. That means Philly, Milwaukee, Denver and Dallas (Assuming Luka development continues) are the most likely teams. If the unusual circumstances occur the Phoenix ensemble or Boston if Tatum makes an unexpected further leap."

Honestly I would say Philly because I like that Maxey kid but with Embiid's potential injury concerns and Harden's unchecked access to greater tri-state area strip clubs, I don't see the requisite 78+ games per year for their major horses.

Current iteration of Dallas isn't talented enough.

GSW are too smart to attempt such an unnecessary feat. Seasons are marathons.

I think Boston probably has the best chance simply due to youth, coaching, and depth. This is highly dependent on them losing to GSW in the NBA Finals, however. If they feel the pain of losing in the Finals, those young guys like Williams, Tatum, and Brown will be scarred and will improve and take every game seriously in the next two seasons. Didn't Boston play at an 8 SRS for much of this year anyway?

Utah rewinds it a bit and does it next season

sp6r=underrated wrote:

Owly wrote:Don't think it's necessarily true. Certainly it's worded quite a bit too strongly.

Maybe one could quibble older eras are less relevent but
1) If I'm distinguishing eras I'd be looking at a very short recent window as the covid era and then be wondering if it continues or we're changing again.
2) The Jazz and 10s Spurs make up 3 of 14 teams. Even within that sample calling that route "basically impossible" seems a stretch. This assumes Harden is in your top 30 ATG definition or Paul is still in prime and counts despite significant absences (both possible, neither striking me as a given otoh).

But going older, '86 Bucks, '91 Blazers, '94 Supersonics (and other versions adjacent). Does Frazier get you there for the 70 Knicks?

From '22 it's hard to say what "normal" was with covid but the Celtics and Suns were about a point away. Could they have got there with a bit more health and or some players (including top players) being a little better and still meet the criteria ... I would think so. Memphis is further but has so many players a long way from that all time elite line (and even Ja).

It's easier to get there with an all time elite guy (and there's some catch 22: if your team succeeds to a high level [though moreso title than an SRS threshold] the perceived star must be historically elite) especially in the era of individual player max contracts but I think other routes are possible.

1. Harden is definitely in my top 30. The 11 of 14 teams account for 78% of the sample size.
2. The teens Spurs had ATGs at the tail end of their primes who still had occasional burst of brilliance and a player entering that stage who had flashes of brilliance. And they had a unique benefit in the modern era of a bunch of guys who spent years playing together. Which leaves us only with the Jazz as a outlier
3. Older teams: fair to point out that some teams in prior eras did reach this threshold. The big change is the 1999 CBA which you touch on in the end. The 1999 CBA resulted in superstars being massively underpaid. This makes it much harder for ensemble teams to compete at the highest of levels since their players can receive their true monetary value while teams built around superstars have a lot of surplus cash relative to production.
4. It is harder to improve from a 7 to a 8 than a 1 to a 2 due to all the backslides a +7 SRS team faces every year.

If you want my statement to say the "post-1999 CBA makes it unlikely for an elite team to emerge without a top 3 talent barring unusual circumstances. That means Philly, Milwaukee, Denver and Dallas (Assuming Luka development continues) are the most likely teams. If the unusual circumstances occur the Phoenix ensemble or Boston if Tatum makes an unexpected further leap."

1) Nothing to disagree with here. Haven't looked closely at where Harden is for peaks or at an all-time list for a while, so can't comment here. More than 1/5 of the time a thing occurs (within a sample - not the complete dataset, though granting era differences) and "basically impossible" aren't exactly synonyms,
2) Going from "post-prime" to hand waving them in as "tail end", granted there are different definitions, they are still absolute terms very good players... I don't love the switch and am inclined more to agree with the original position. On"they had other circumstances". Well other teams may have other circumstances that get them to exceptional. It's a rare route, but not impossible. Continuity advantages are relative too (i.e. if everyone's changing teams more - and with shorter contracts I imagine they are). It might be argued that Tatum, Brown, Smart, Horford(?) represent a continuity core (and could become more of one though doing so and having a good team around it becomes more difficult because of 3).
3) We are agreed here. Player maxes in an overall cap situation mean the genuine elite give great value and represent the clear easiest route to excellence.
4) True. Relevance? Is this regarding my teams mentioned? They weren't proposals as to who will in future. Rather teams who in another run could have this year (or in Memphis's case more an alternate, slightly improving every player alternate universe version, or maybe I suppose an optimistic future - I haven't a clue what their cap, contracts, assets situation looks like). This will face some regressions but not all of them (there isn't for instance a "you have to pay us more than we're worth because you need to keep together a winner" situation, for instance).

Summary I think I generally agree with, though not sure I fully understand re Boston. Is Tatum taking a leap but still not top 3 (which, yeah the top 3 were really good) ... but then why would it need to be Tatum making a leap. Couldn't it be Brown. Or another player. Or multiple players leading to net improvement. Or sustaining later season play (related: or not having Schroeder or having White longer ...)

Owly wrote:

sp6r=underrated wrote:

Owly wrote:Don't think it's necessarily true. Certainly it's worded quite a bit too strongly.

Maybe one could quibble older eras are less relevent but
1) If I'm distinguishing eras I'd be looking at a very short recent window as the covid era and then be wondering if it continues or we're changing again.
2) The Jazz and 10s Spurs make up 3 of 14 teams. Even within that sample calling that route "basically impossible" seems a stretch. This assumes Harden is in your top 30 ATG definition or Paul is still in prime and counts despite significant absences (both possible, neither striking me as a given otoh).

But going older, '86 Bucks, '91 Blazers, '94 Supersonics (and other versions adjacent). Does Frazier get you there for the 70 Knicks?

From '22 it's hard to say what "normal" was with covid but the Celtics and Suns were about a point away. Could they have got there with a bit more health and or some players (including top players) being a little better and still meet the criteria ... I would think so. Memphis is further but has so many players a long way from that all time elite line (and even Ja).

It's easier to get there with an all time elite guy (and there's some catch 22: if your team succeeds to a high level [though moreso title than an SRS threshold] the perceived star must be historically elite) especially in the era of individual player max contracts but I think other routes are possible.

1. Harden is definitely in my top 30. The 11 of 14 teams account for 78% of the sample size.
2. The teens Spurs had ATGs at the tail end of their primes who still had occasional burst of brilliance and a player entering that stage who had flashes of brilliance. And they had a unique benefit in the modern era of a bunch of guys who spent years playing together. Which leaves us only with the Jazz as a outlier
3. Older teams: fair to point out that some teams in prior eras did reach this threshold. The big change is the 1999 CBA which you touch on in the end. The 1999 CBA resulted in superstars being massively underpaid. This makes it much harder for ensemble teams to compete at the highest of levels since their players can receive their true monetary value while teams built around superstars have a lot of surplus cash relative to production.
4. It is harder to improve from a 7 to a 8 than a 1 to a 2 due to all the backslides a +7 SRS team faces every year.

If you want my statement to say the "post-1999 CBA makes it unlikely for an elite team to emerge without a top 3 talent barring unusual circumstances. That means Philly, Milwaukee, Denver and Dallas (Assuming Luka development continues) are the most likely teams. If the unusual circumstances occur the Phoenix ensemble or Boston if Tatum makes an unexpected further leap."

1) Nothing to disagree with here. Haven't looked closely at where Harden is for peaks or at an all-time list for a while, so can't comment here. More than 1/5 of the time a thing occurs (within a sample - not the complete dataset, though granting era differences) and "basically impossible" aren't exactly synonyms,
2) Going from "post-prime" to hand waving them in as "tail end", granted there are different definitions, they are still absolute terms very good players... I don't love the switch and am inclined more to agree with the original position. On"they had other circumstances". Well other teams may have other circumstances that get them to exceptional. It's a rare route, but not impossible. Continuity advantages are relative too (i.e. if everyone's changing teams more - and with shorter contracts I imagine they are). It might be argued that Tatum, Brown, Smart, Horford(?) represent a continuity core (and could become more of one though doing so and having a good team around it becomes more difficult because of 3).
3) We are agreed here. Player maxes in an overall cap situation mean the genuine elite give great value and represent the clear easiest route to excellence.
4) True. Relevance? Is this regarding my teams mentioned? They weren't proposals as to who will in future. Rather teams who in another run could have this year (or in Memphis's case more an alternate, slightly improving every player alternate universe version, or maybe I suppose an optimistic future - I haven't a clue what their cap, contracts, assets situation looks like). This will face some regressions but not all of them (there isn't for instance a "you have to pay us more than we're worth because you need to keep together a winner" situation, for instance).

Summary I think I generally agree with, though not sure I fully understand re Boston. Is Tatum taking a leap but still not top 3 (which, yeah the top 3 were really good) ... but then why would it need to be Tatum making a leap. Couldn't it be Brown. Or another player. Or multiple players leading to net improvement. Or sustaining later season play (related: or not having Schroeder or having White longer ...)

My primary concern with Boston, is Horford being essential but old, Tatum who I may incorrectly peg has nothing have a higher ceiling and the general difficulty of keeping an ensemble running at a high level year to year. if you feel I'm shortchanging them fair enough.

Back to max salaries, it has always been strange to me that the people who complain about superstars forming superteams generally don't favor eliminating max contracts. If superstars could be paid their actual value, while retaining a soft cap, the likelihood they'll play together is far lower.

Think it's clearly Memphis

Good SRS team this year already, not super reliant on anyone over the age of 25, Ja + JJJ + Desmond Bane are all 22/23 and can be reasonably expected to improve as they enter their prime, and they have a bunch of other young guys who could turn into legitimate contributors on top of that

Jaivl wrote:Doncic/Gobert Mavs

Really hope that trade happens.